Model Railway Forum banner
1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
This is an OO layout plan, length 4 metres. I'm wondering if positioning a turntable (Peco?) so it's accessible from the terminus station (the two long straight horizontal sidings) as well as the goods shunting area beneath is a good idea, or not. Sorry my turntable looks like it's floating away... I'm planning it as Era 2 steam, with 6 wheel coaches as maximum length items of rolling stock. Any comments gratefully accepted!
Rectangle Font Line Slope Parallel
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,870 Posts
Welcome to the forum. I am sorry if much of what is below seems negative but it is meant to avoid you making an expensive mistake.

Firstly, the terminus station area looks cramped. I would move the point in the middle to the left a bit to give you more room. Secondly I can understand the desire for a turntable on a steam-based layout, but a large one will dominate the scene and not look right. (is the Peco one the same size as the Hornby one which is very large?) Tank engines don't need turning and for very short trains might be better.

Now for the run round loops. (I assume that trains will leave the terminus, run clockwise, then reverse in the loop on the left, to go anti-clockwise back to the station.) You need more clearance at the points than you might think. Neither loop look big enough for more than a couple of six-wheeled coaches, maybe three with luck. Is this what you intended? If you have some track and rolling stock already, try the arrangement and pushing an engine round some coaches.

Good luck with the project whatever you decide.
 

·
In depth idiot
Joined
·
7,808 Posts
... a turntable ... I'm planning it as Era 2 steam...
There simply isn't a turntable available RTP (Hornby) or cheaply kit built (Peco) in OO that is correct for Era 2, or indeed for any UK 'Era'! Both these items are overscale for the largest turntables used in the UK, and are way oversize for what was typical from 1875 to the end of the pre-group period, if that matters at all to you.

(I would hope that with manufacturers beginning to show real interest in pre-group models, there might eventually be a 45 or 50 foot turntable produced, but don't hold your breath...)

The simpler option given your layout design is a 'reverse loop' to turn locos. Needs some wiring and a switch for DC, or a reverse loop module if opting for DCC. I would further suggest at least one parallel loop alongside the top straight of your diagram. Allows storage of a train, while another is running. Or better yet a double track layout, but this is a matter of personal choice...

Now, track. The plan looks like it is created from 'set track' which is rigid track pieces of fixed length and radius. At 4m overall length, it will be more economic built from a flexible track system, which also supplies a superior choice of points. More trouble to lay, but a better end result and usually about half the price, because the 'plain track' comes at about 40% the price of the same length of set track curves and straights. (In the UK the 'turnover point' where a flexi system nets out cheaper than set track, typically occurs when the plain track required for the layout plan requires more than half a 25 yard box of Peco flexitrack. However you would need to cost that out for Oz.) Have fun!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Many thanks for taking the time to reply! The Peco turntable is 327mm in diameter, and Hornby is 382mm, but yes they are bigger than a typical era 2 example. I think the reverse loop idea is very good. Thanks for that. I do intend to use flexible track of course. I was having trouble using AnyRail and making do with the free trial. Thanks again for your comments!
 

·
In depth idiot
Joined
·
7,808 Posts
Hopefully you are aware that Peco are now producing a code 75 bullhead rail OO track system - just flexi and large radius points so far - which will far better suit the period you wish to represent, than any flatbottom rail track system? Small disappointment, the point geometry is as streamline, rather than the smaller crossing angle of prototype formations, but on the positive side the point base is slightly more flexible than their earlier ranges. Once ballasted, the appearance of the narrow rail between the chairs positioned well above the ballast is most satisfying. (I model the end of BR steam, and the clear contrast the BH track provides with FB main line track is a good effect.)

Peco's production was halted by a switch to supply of PPE during the Covid outbreak, but they appear to be getting back to normal, and they appear confident that the medium points and slips should emerge fairly soon to enlarge choice in the BH range.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
896 Posts
Hi mate,
Key thing is you have a nice space to achieve 'something'. I think if you eliminated everything in the middle of the right hand side including the station and turntable, you would really have something to work with. You'd now have a lovely single-track run, with huge potential for scenics and making it look like somewhere in the UK in Era 2 (i.e. I'm guessing you are aiming for Edwardian feel). The bottom right part of the loop could be a through station and passing point for trains, then more realistic might be a goods yard/cattle dock in the middle. Many starters wish for too much, but with your single track roundy, you could really excel. On left hand edge, you could put in 3 siding loops for stabling and assembling trains, all hidden in a scenic break with tunnel entrances top and bottom left.
Next you need to decide where your single-track line might be, because this will govern the rolling stock you need, the housing styles, even the fences!! What is your preferred Railway Company to work with ? Is it a LBSCR branch line in Sussex (Bluebell, Sussex-Surrey border e.g. Christ's hospital to Guildford)? Is it a GWR branch? Is it GER in East Anglia (Suffolk/Norfolk/borders etc) ? Is it LNWR, Midland, GNR.?? There are some really nice locos out there these days, for any of these and other companies. You can really do something nice.
Actually on your layout you would not even need a turntable because it would be highly likely that you only need tank locos.
Just some initial thoughts, happy to help with other details, between us on this forum the is a lot of historical expertise.
Cheers
6991

PS Of course, if you want to spend money on whatever you want and run whatever, that is your prerogative, we all know that. I just see a really nice opportunity to create a good pre-WW1 layout here.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,093 Posts
Just to add another perspective, nothing wrong with a terminal some did not have a turntable if there was one quite nearby such as Seaton in Devon but there was one general rule, on twin track the trains drive on the left, so they arrive on the left, then usually a tank shunts the carriages to the right platform(s) and release the loco which will go to shed and be serviced and turned, this could be done on either side but seems more likely to the RHS of the station as you approach once this was done it could return and tow the train away.
As above tanks are under represented but on the GWR made up 50% of locos falling to about 30% on the GNR etc. some like the North London specialised in tanks.
As to a return loop Roco make this but is part of a system, likely more expensive but will outlast your great grandchildren
As to the layout I'll do it the Irish way - If oi was sartin from here I'd not be doin it tis way!
I think some research is in order try disused stations and look at some small rural stations - without cross checking like Uppingham, Clayton West, Halifax St Pauls, Cheltenham St James (a bit bigger but a favourite of mine) and there are many other abandoned terminals that will keep you busy for a while.
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top